Relating to information sharing between state and federal authorities.
Summary
HB 2466 amends Oregon’s restrictions on cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The bill keeps in place the general prohibition on state and local law enforcement agencies and other public bodies using public resources to investigate, detain, or assist with civil immigration enforcement, and it continues to bar routine sharing of custody-related information with federal immigration authorities. It also preserves existing limits on asking about immigration status, with exceptions for criminal investigations, court proceedings, and eligibility determinations for benefits.
The main change is a new exception allowing a law enforcement agency or public body to share information, or enter into an agreement to share information, when needed to effect an international extradition of a person charged with or convicted of a crime in Oregon and subject to an arrest warrant. The bill also requires agencies to give detained or committed individuals written notice, with translation if requested, explaining their right not to disclose nationality, citizenship, or immigration status and warning that disclosure may lead to immigration enforcement. It authorizes civil actions to enjoin violations and preserves a narrow exception for public health data collection by OHA and DHS.
Impact
HB 2466 would amend ORS 181A.823 and 181A.826, Oregon’s sanctuary-style limits on immigration enforcement cooperation. It would create a specific statutory exception for information sharing needed to carry out international extradition requests involving people charged with or convicted of Oregon crimes, while continuing to prohibit cooperation with federal immigration authorities for civil immigration enforcement in most other circumstances. The bill also reinforces documentation, reporting, and public transparency requirements for immigration-related requests received by public bodies, and it leaves existing civil enforcement remedies in place.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted clarification rather than a broad policy reversal. Its structure suggests support for maintaining Oregon’s general limits on immigration enforcement cooperation while accommodating criminal justice needs tied to extradition. No formal vote history or transcript evidence is provided here to show broader legislative support or opposition.
Contention
The likely point of contention is the balance between Oregon’s sanctuary protections and the need to cooperate with international extradition requests. Supporters would likely emphasize that the bill preserves the core ban on civil immigration enforcement assistance while fixing a narrow gap for criminal extradition. Opponents, if any, may focus on whether the extradition exception could create pressure for broader information sharing or weaken the state’s restrictions on cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The bill also maintains a strict prohibition on administrative subpoenas from federal immigration authorities, which may remain a point of concern for agencies seeking more flexibility.